Matronics Email Lists Forum Index Matronics Email Lists
Web Forum Interface to the Matronics Email Lists
 
 Get Email Distribution Too!Get Email Distribution Too!    FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Maximum structural cruise

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> Yak-List
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
k7wx(at)earthlink.net
Guest
PostPosted: Sun Jul 26, 2009 8:22 pm    Post subject: Maximum structural cruise Reply with quote
Fellow CJ-ers,

I wonder if there is a consensus on a figure in knots for maximum
structural cruise for the CJ-6A?

Warren Hill
Mesa, AZ

On Jul 26, 2009, at 6:19 PM, Chris Wise wrote:

Quote:
G'Day,

Thanks to Walt, Pappy and Dennis for replying.
The M14P has a rubber lip seal as well as a slinger, like Walt says.
The slinger by itself is inadequate, especially during aeros.
Any other advice would be appreciated re removing prop reduction box
and the prop shaft.

Thanks and Cheers,
Chris.




- The Matronics Yak-List Email Forum -
 

Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:

http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
Back to top
jblake207(at)COMCAST.NET
Guest
PostPosted: Mon Jul 27, 2009 8:10 am    Post subject: Maximum structural cruise Reply with quote
Find attached a "Vee" Speeds chart that I use for my CJ. Developed from the manuals and from lots of questions asked of people like Pappy, Sapp, Savarese and others.
 
If I were a lawyer, I'd make a comment about using at your own risk and that this office cannot be held liable for any incorrect data... blah, blah, blah. I'm not a lawyer, so let me simply say use or lose.
 
JB


---

- The Matronics Yak-List Email Forum -
 

Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:

http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List


Vee_Speeds.doc
 Description:

Download
 Filename:  Vee_Speeds.doc
 Filesize:  28 KB
 Downloaded:  277 Time(s)
Back to top
k7wx(at)earthlink.net
Guest
PostPosted: Mon Jul 27, 2009 9:00 am    Post subject: Maximum structural cruise Reply with quote
JB,

Thanks. Very helpful.

I have seen maximum structural cruise (Vno, top of green arc) listed
on one CJ site as 153 knots (282 KmH or 176 MPH). This seems a little
low, but wanted to double check. Did not see Vno mentioned on your V-
speed list.

Warren Hill
Mesa, AZ

On Jul 27, 2009, at 8:47 AM, jblake207(at)COMCAST.NET wrote:

[quote] Find attached a "Vee" Speeds chart that I use for my CJ. Developed
from the manuals and from lots of questions asked of people like
Pappy, Sapp, Savarese and others.

If I were a lawyer, I'd make a comment about using at your own risk
and that this office cannot be held liable for any incorrect data...
blah, blah, blah. I'm not a lawyer, so let me simply say use or lose.

JB
---

- The Matronics Yak-List Email Forum -
 

Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:

http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List


Vee_Speeds.doc
 Description:

Download
 Filename:  Vee_Speeds.doc
 Filesize:  28 KB
 Downloaded:  268 Time(s)
Back to top
viperdoc(at)mindspring.co
Guest
PostPosted: Mon Jul 27, 2009 10:36 am    Post subject: Maximum structural cruise Reply with quote
Just remember…the ass you bust maybe your own.
doc

From: owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of jblake207(at)comcast.net
Sent: Monday, July 27, 2009 10:47 AM
To: yak-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: Re: Maximum structural cruise



Find attached a "Vee" Speeds chart that I use for my CJ. Developed from the manuals and from lots of questions asked of people like Pappy, Sapp, Savarese and others.

If I were a lawyer, I'd make a comment about using at your own risk and that this office cannot be held liable for any incorrect data... blah, blah, blah. I'm not a lawyer, so let me simply say use or lose.

JB


---

- The Matronics Yak-List Email Forum -
 

Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:

http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
Back to top
netmaster15(at)juno.com
Guest
PostPosted: Mon Jul 27, 2009 12:44 pm    Post subject: Maximum structural cruise Reply with quote
Doc, How many people do you know who have "busted their asses" due to exceeding max structural cruise without exceeding Vne? This should raise the questions: What is max structural cruise meant to protect? and, Is max structural cruise a "LIMITATION" , or a NORMAL OPERATION PROCEDURE? If the latter, then, I submit it is no different than any other number within the yellow arc and does not deserve to be over dignified beyond those numbers within such parameter. In other words, it is nothing more than cocktail information. If one insists upon operating within the yellow arc, do not encounter turbulent air lest you exceed MAX GUST LOAD; now there IS a number you should know and understand beyond the cocktail hour.
Cliff Umscheid

--------

- The Matronics Yak-List Email Forum -
 

Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:

http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
Back to top
viperdoc(at)mindspring.co
Guest
PostPosted: Mon Jul 27, 2009 7:23 pm    Post subject: Maximum structural cruise Reply with quote
Cliff,
Answer…Yes I know of 2 aircraft that went down while operating in structural cruise “Limitation” as you say. Both were Class A accidents with 2 fatalities in each. One an F-5F and the other a T-38. I served as the flight surgeon representative to the SIB (safety investigation board) on the F-5 and I was the interim representative on the T-38 SIB.  Four men died while operating their aircraft within  “ NORMAL OPERATION PROCEDURE’ as you say. We call it differently since we don’t have a yellow arcs on our airspeed indicators. Incidentally, one of the IP’s in the F-5 was a good friend of mine.  So yes, I know firsthand  of two aircraft that failed  while operating within their envelope.
Now the question I have for you is: Are you prepared to totally bet your rosy pink on whatever Red Star Aircraft it is you are flying? Have you NDI’d/ magnafluxed your aircraft to determine if you have metal fatigue or not. Its’ a military aircraft not a spam can. It was and is operated like or as a military aircraft. Cruise limits don’t exist. Vne and G limits do. An you do not know for dead nuts sure what the real structural  (read metal fatigue state) integrity of your spare or spine is. You can only hope that the entries in that Eastern bloc aircraft’s log book really were done and not just pencil whipped.  Granted, these aircraft are tough as nails but so are/ were the F-5, T-38, F-15, A-10, and the F-16. Their wing are cracking. In some cases the wings are falling off as well as their dorsal spines are breaking. You just never know.
Oh…make it 3 aircraft that I know of that “ broke up” while operating within their “ NORMAL OPERATING LIMITS”.  I believe the St Louis Guard lost a twin tail sissy  to structural failure while operating “ in normal ops limits” approximately a year and a half ago. That Eagle driver was lucky, he got out with a shattered elbow and some contusions. Rumor has it they are still extracting fragments of seat cushion from his rosy pink after he sucked it up while tumbling/ somersaulting in the pit while trying to figure out why his jet was not responding any longer.
By the way my comment initially was made in jest  in response to Saber’s last line of his post. I was not aware we had a “MAX GUST LOAD”  on the YAK. Maybe the CJ does.  G limits yes…Vne yes… max crosswind limits yes….Max Gust Load ???
We do not have  cocktail hours in any of the squadrons I have served with either. Either the beer light was lit or it  was not. The beer light was lit when the last jet landed. Cocktail hour…...
Doc
From: owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of netmaster15(at)juno.com
Sent: Monday, July 27, 2009 3:35 PM
To: yak-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: RE: Maximum structural cruise


Doc, How many people do you know who have "busted their asses" due to exceeding max structural cruise without exceeding Vne? This should raise the questions: What is max structural cruise meant to protect? and, Is max structural cruise a "LIMITATION" , or a NORMAL OPERATION PROCEDURE? If the latter, then, I submit it is no different than any other number within the yellow arc and does not deserve to be over dignified beyond those numbers within such parameter. In other words, it is nothing more than cocktail information. If one insists upon operating within the yellow arc, do not encounter turbulent air lest you exceed MAX GUST LOAD; now there IS a number you should know and understand beyond the cocktail hour.
Cliff Umscheid

--------

- The Matronics Yak-List Email Forum -
 

Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:

http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
Back to top
andrew(at)nzactive.com
Guest
PostPosted: Mon Jul 27, 2009 8:26 pm    Post subject: Maximum structural cruise Reply with quote
DOC
 
Please excuse me for intruding on your list. I fly a Harmon Rocket, (mainly) but eavesdrop on the Yak list cos I'm in a partnership that is rebuilding a Yak-3 in New Zealand.
 
Anyway...
 
I have been concerned about this issue for some time, in my Harmon Rocket. It goes kinda fast, and sometimes I hit pretty harsh bumps when I'm flying in the yellow arc. (yeah, I know, I should anticipate better.) I've often wondered if there's a way to check for metal fatigue or overstressing - is this magnaflux thing something that can be done to wing and horizontal stablizer spars? Is it a reasonably common procedure (ie, likely to be available in NZ)...or a real specialist kinda thing?
 
Andrew
 
 

From: owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Roger Kemp M.D.
Sent: Tuesday, July 28, 2009 3:30 PM
To: yak-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: RE: Yak-List: Maximum structural cruise


Cliff,
Answer…Yes I know of 2 aircraft that went down while operating in structural cruise “Limitation” as you say. Both were Class A accidents with 2 fatalities in each. One an F-5F and the other a T-38. I served as the flight surgeon representative to the SIB (safety investigation board) on the F-5 and I was the interim representative on the T-38 SIB.  Four men died while operating their aircraft within  “ NORMAL OPERATION PROCEDURE’ as you say. We call it differently since we don’t have a yellow arcs on our airspeed indicators. Incidentally, one of the IP’s in the F-5 was a good friend of mine.  So yes, I know firsthand  of two aircraft that failed  while operating within their envelope.
Now the question I have for you is: Are you prepared to totally bet your rosy pink on whatever Red Star Aircraft it is you are flying? Have you NDI’d/ magnafluxed your aircraft to determine if you have metal fatigue or not. Its’ a military aircraft not a spam can. It was and is operated like or as a military aircraft. Cruise limits don’t exist. Vne and G limits do. An you do not know for dead nuts sure what the real structural  (read metal fatigue state) integrity of your spare or spine is. You can only hope that the entries in that Eastern bloc aircraft’s log book really were done and not just pencil whipped.  Granted, these aircraft are tough as nails but so are/ were the F-5, T-38, F-15, A-10, and the F-16. Their wing are cracking. In some cases the wings are falling off as well as their dorsal spines are breaking. You just never know.
Oh…make it 3 aircraft that I know of that “ broke up” while operating within their “ NORMAL OPERATING LIMITS”.  I believe the St Louis Guard lost a twin tail sissy  to structural failure while operating “ in normal ops limits” approximately a year and a half ago. That Eagle driver was lucky, he got out with a shattered elbow and some contusions. Rumor has it they are still extracting fragments of seat cushion from his rosy pink after he sucked it up while tumbling/ somersaulting in the pit while trying to figure out why his jet was not responding any longer.
By the way my comment initially was made in jest  in response to Saber’s last line of his post. I was not aware we had a “MAX GUST LOAD”  on the YAK. Maybe the CJ does.  G limits yes…Vne yes… max crosswind limits yes….Max Gust Load ???
We do not have  cocktail hours in any of the squadrons I have served with either. Either the beer light was lit or it  was not. The beer light was lit when the last jet landed. Cocktail hour…...
Doc
From: owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of netmaster15(at)juno.com
Sent: Monday, July 27, 2009 3:35 PM
To: yak-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: RE: Yak-List: Maximum structural cruise

 
Doc,   How many people do you know who have "busted their asses" due to exceeding max  structural cruise without exceeding Vne?  This should raise the questions: What is max structural cruise meant to protect? and, Is max structural cruise a "LIMITATION" , or a NORMAL OPERATION PROCEDURE? If the latter, then, I submit it is no different than any other number within the yellow arc and does not deserve to be over dignified beyond those numbers within such parameter. In other words, it is nothing more than cocktail information. If one insists upon operating within the yellow arc, do not encounter turbulent air lest you exceed MAX GUST LOAD; now there IS a number you should  know and understand beyond the cocktail hour.
Cliff Umscheid

---------- Original Message ----------
From: "Roger Kemp M.D." <viperdoc(at)mindspring.com>
To: <yak-list(at)matronics.com>
Subject: RE: Yak-List: Maximum structural cruise
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 2009 13:29:36 -0500
Just remember…the ass you bust maybe your own.
doc
 
From: owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of jblake207(at)comcast.net
Sent: Monday, July 27, 2009 10:47 AM
To: yak-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Maximum structural cruise


 
Find attached a "Vee" Speeds chart that I use for my CJ.  Developed from the manuals and from lots of questions asked of people like Pappy, Sapp, Savarese and others. 
 
If I were a lawyer, I'd make a comment about using at your own risk and that this office cannot be held liable for any incorrect data... blah, blah, blah.  I'm not a lawyer, so let me simply say use or lose. 
 
JB
 

----- Original Message -----
From: "Warren Hill" <k7wx(at)earthlink.net>
To: yak-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Sunday, July 26, 2009 10:12:26 PM GMT -06:00 US/Canada Central
Subject: Yak-List: Maximum structural cruise

--> Yak-List message posted by: Warren Hill <k7wx(at)earthlink.net>

Fellow CJ-ers,

I wonder if there is a consensus on a figure in knots for maximum  
structural cruise for the CJ-6A?

Warren Hill
Mesa, AZ

On Jul 26, 2009, at 6:19 PM, Chris Wise wrote:

Quote:
G'Day,

Thanks to Walt, Pappy and Dennis for replying.
The M14P has a rubber lip seal as well as a slinger, like Walt says.
The slinger by itself is inadequate, especially during aeros.
Any other advice would be appreciated re removing prop reduction box  
and the prop shaft.

Thanks and Cheers,
Chris.




               -Matt Dralle, List ==========

Quote:
  ====================================ttp://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List====================================tronics.com====================================www.matronics.com/contribution====================================  
0
Quote:
 
1
Quote:
 
2
Quote:
 
3
Quote:
 
4
Quote:
 
5
Quote:
 
6
Quote:
 
7
Quote:
 
8
Quote:
 
9
Quote:
====================================
0
Quote:
====================================
1
Quote:
====================================
2
Quote:
====================================
3
Quote:
====================================
4
Quote:
====================================
5
Quote:
====================================
6
Quote:
====================================
7
Quote:
====================================
8
Quote:
====================================
9
[quote][b]

- The Matronics Yak-List Email Forum -
 

Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:

http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
Back to top
netmaster15(at)juno.com
Guest
PostPosted: Mon Jul 27, 2009 10:22 pm    Post subject: Maximum structural cruise Reply with quote
Doc, Thankyou for your response on the subject of " max structural cruise" . If I understand you correctly we are both saying the same thing; the water gets a bit muddy when we try to reconcile simantic differences. eg, reference your first paragraph: " ....while operating in STRUCTURAL CRUISE LIMITATION...." Please define "structural cruise". Also, what discipline categorizes structural cruise as a LIMITATION as opposed to a NORMAL OPERATING condition? All Operations Manuals I have been exposed to in the last 63 years cite Limitations as Vne, VA, Vlo, Vle, Vfe,max allow. TO Gr WT, max fuel, max tire speed, max pressure differential, max operating altitude, plus several other operating limitations. All these limitations are derived from one source; the TYPE CERTIFICATE AND DATA SHEETS and amendments thereto, eg, supplemental type certificates if applicable. Also in your first paragraph you use the phrase "....while operating within their envelope...." But you do not specify what envelope you're referring to. I agree, there is no yellow arc on the airspeed indicator in an F-5 but there is certainly a Mach meter and a Max Mach operating LIMITATION. Plainly, it is very difficult to translate terminology between two different disciplines.
I'll have to finish this treatise at a later time; I'm already beyond my curfew limitation. I look forward to your continuing thoughts on this subject. BTW, I currently own and fly both a YAK -50  and a Harmon Rocket and you're correct, I don't want any major dissassemblies at altitude so I'm always alert for new ways to assure the aircraft remains in reuseable condition. Cheers! 
Cliff

--------

- The Matronics Yak-List Email Forum -
 

Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:

http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
Back to top
mark.bitterlich(at)navy.m
Guest
PostPosted: Tue Jul 28, 2009 5:43 am    Post subject: Maximum structural cruise Reply with quote
Comments:
In the Marine Corps, there really is no such thing as a Max Mach Operating Limitation on most tactical aircraft .... I am sure there is probably one for the prop driven aircraft, but on the jets, the mach limit is that speed you reach while going straight down in burner... If you happen to have burner.

Of note is the fact that we too are seeing major structural fatigue problems in a lot of our older aircraft. That was the single MAJOR REASON that the A-6E Intruder was retired early.

On my personal YAK-50, I was originally told that the aircraft was rated at plus 9, negative 6 G. Then I did a ton of research and found that you were supposed to RECORD certain parameters of each flight and this added points to a number that when it was met, the wings on the aircraft were basically retired. In the case of the YAK-50, in many cases the whole aircraft was "retired" sometimes after just 50 hours of flight time. Of note is the fact that most everyone pulls that recording equipment out of the 50's AND 52's, and doesn't "bother with it anymore". Lot's of other pilots have done this kind of thing before our YAK's came on to the scene. Examples: T-34's. AT-6's. Both of those aircraft types have experienced the "WING OFF" warning light illuminating during flight. With fatal results in every case... And most of those were wearing chutes by the way. I have personally limited my 50 to plus 5 G's and negative 2. Even that is questionable, but I am willing to take the risk, but do acknowledge that it IS a risk. I also do not compete the aircraft anymore, and I don't participate in any ACM stuff.

Eddy current and magnafluxing tests are pretty much out of my budget range. So... It's a risk.

Mark
--

- The Matronics Yak-List Email Forum -
 

Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:

http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
Back to top
aerobaticgirl(at)yahoo.co
Guest
PostPosted: Tue Jul 28, 2009 2:53 pm    Post subject: Maximum structural cruise Reply with quote
5 Gs? That's it? I haven't flown the 50, but in my 55, I routinely fly 6G positive and 3G negative. Heard anything regarding the 55?

Smash

--- On Tue, 7/28/09, Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point, MALS-14 64E <mark.bitterlich(at)navy.mil> wrote:

[quote] From: Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point, MALS-14 64E <mark.bitterlich(at)navy.mil>
Subject: RE: Maximum structural cruise
To: yak-list(at)matronics.com
Date: Tuesday, July 28, 2009, 8:31 AM

"Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point, MALS-14 64E"
<mark.bitterlich(at)navy.mil>



Comments:


In the Marine Corps, there really is no such thing as a Max
Mach Operating Limitation on most tactical aircraft .... I
am sure there is probably one for the prop driven aircraft,
but on the jets, the mach limit is that speed you reach
while going straight down in burner... If you happen to have
burner.   

Of note is the fact that we too are seeing major structural
fatigue problems in a lot of our older aircraft.  That
was the single MAJOR REASON that the A-6E Intruder was
retired early. 

On my personal YAK-50, I was originally told that the
aircraft was rated at plus 9, negative 6 G.  Then I did
a ton of research and found that you were supposed to RECORD
certain parameters of each flight and this added points to a
number that when it was met, the wings on the aircraft were
basically retired.  In the case of the YAK-50, in many
cases the whole aircraft was "retired" sometimes after just
50 hours of flight time.  Of note is the fact that most
everyone pulls that recording equipment out of the 50's AND
52's, and doesn't "bother with it anymore".  Lot's of
other pilots have done this kind of thing before our YAK's
came on to the scene.  Examples:  T-34's. 
AT-6's.  Both of those aircraft types have experienced
the "WING OFF" warning light illuminating during
flight.  With fatal results in every case... And most
of those were wearing chutes by the way.  I have
personally limited my 50 to plus 5 G's and negative 2. 
Even that is questionable, but I am willing to !
take the risk, but do acknowledge that it IS a risk. 
I also do not compete the aircraft anymore, and I don't
participate in any ACM stuff. 

Eddy current and magnafluxing tests are pretty much out of
my budget range.  So... It's a risk. 

Mark


--

- The Matronics Yak-List Email Forum -
 

Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:

http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
Back to top
viperdoc(at)mindspring.co
Guest
PostPosted: Tue Jul 28, 2009 6:26 pm    Post subject: Maximum structural cruise Reply with quote
Andrew,
So you are one of the guys involved in restoring that YAK 3 in NZ. I think I talked to someone about that bird at onetime then decided the expense would exceed the benefit. Looks like that may well be the case with the current economy here in the US.
To answer your question, yes the capability to eddy current and magnaflux along with, NDT (xray) exist. The expense of xraying the airframe for me is prohibitive. I probably could get the guys in the airframe shop to NDT my bird when they are doing one of our jets but that would be highly illegal for me to ask for that. So, I just have to pull panels and stick a digital camera  in the wings and fuselage to snap pictures of those places that I cannot see by looking in.  Another thing to invest in I would guess (I have not yet) is a bore scope. Still though, if you can see the cracks with your eyes it is already a big problem.
http://www.directindustry.com/scripts/IDPHeader.php?s=9257&URL=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.geinspectiontechnologies.com%2Fen%2Fproducts%2Feddy_current%2Findex.html&IDVisite=&MotCle=&RefCat=&IDProduit=57817&IDProdSource=&SourceType=Produit
The above url will show you a portable eddy current system (Pulstec) made by GE for the aerospace industry. I have not had the guts to ask the cost of the devise and the practicality of having a portable eddy current sytem begs practicality for me.  
Magnaflux is a spray kit that can be found in most auto parts stores. It is a combination of penetrentt and developer that you spray on the surface to detect a crack. It works well for accessible areas of the airframe. I used it to find a crack in my fuel tank on my 50.  Here is the URL for Magnaflux for more info. http://www.magnaflux.com/ProductOverview/Penetrant/tabid/96/Default.aspx
The two above systems are affordable not practical for doing a complete spar. Someone else can comment of that. I
Doc

From: owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of ACTIVE NZ - Andrew
Sent: Monday, July 27, 2009 11:30 PM
To: yak-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: RE: Maximum structural cruise



DOC

Please excuse me for intruding on your list. I fly a Harmon Rocket, (mainly) but eavesdrop on the Yak list cos I'm in a partnership that is rebuilding a Yak-3 in New Zealand.

Anyway...

I have been concerned about this issue for some time, in my Harmon Rocket. It goes kinda fast, and sometimes I hit pretty harsh bumps when I'm flying in the yellow arc. (yeah, I know, I should anticipate better.) I've often wondered if there's a way to check for metal fatigue or overstressing - is this magnaflux thing something that can be done to wing and horizontal stablizer spars? Is it a reasonably common procedure (ie, likely to be available in NZ)...or a real specialist kinda thing?

Andrew






From: owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Roger Kemp M.D.
Sent: Tuesday, July 28, 2009 3:30 PM
To: yak-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: RE: Maximum structural cruise
Cliff,
Answer…Yes I know of 2 aircraft that went down while operating in structural cruise “Limitation” as you say. Both were Class A accidents with 2 fatalities in each. One an F-5F and the other a T-38. I served as the flight surgeon representative to the SIB (safety investigation board) on the F-5 and I was the interim representative on the T-38 SIB. Four men died while operating their aircraft within “ NORMAL OPERATION PROCEDURE’ as you say. We call it differently since we don’t have a yellow arcs on our airspeed indicators. Incidentally, one of the IP’s in the F-5 was a good friend of mine. So yes, I know firsthand of two aircraft that failed while operating within their envelope.
Now the question I have for you is: Are you prepared to totally bet your rosy pink on whatever Red Star Aircraft it is you are flying? Have you NDI’d/ magnafluxed your aircraft to determine if you have metal fatigue or not. Its’ a military aircraft not a spam can. It was and is operated like or as a military aircraft. Cruise limits don’t exist. Vne and G limits do. An you do not know for dead nuts sure what the real structural (read metal fatigue state) integrity of your spare or spine is. You can only hope that the entries in that Eastern bloc aircraft’s log book really were done and not just pencil whipped. Granted, these aircraft are tough as nails but so are/ were the F-5, T-38, F-15, A-10, and the F-16. Their wing are cracking. In some cases the wings are falling off as well as their dorsal spines are breaking. You just never know.
Oh…make it 3 aircraft that I know of that “ broke up” while operating within their “ NORMAL OPERATING LIMITS”. I believe the St Louis Guard lost a twin tail sissy to structural failure while operating “ in normal ops limits” approximately a year and a half ago. That Eagle driver was lucky, he got out with a shattered elbow and some contusions. Rumor has it they are still extracting fragments of seat cushion from his rosy pink after he sucked it up while tumbling/ somersaulting in the pit while trying to figure out why his jet was not responding any longer.
By the way my comment initially was made in jest in response to Saber’s last line of his post. I was not aware we had a “MAX GUST LOAD” on the YAK. Maybe the CJ does. G limits yes…Vne yes… max crosswind limits yes….Max Gust Load ???
We do not have cocktail hours in any of the squadrons I have served with either. Either the beer light was lit or it was not. The beer light was lit when the last jet landed. Cocktail hour…...
Doc
From: owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of netmaster15(at)juno.com
Sent: Monday, July 27, 2009 3:35 PM
To: yak-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: RE: Maximum structural cruise


Doc, How many people do you know who have "busted their asses" due to exceeding max structural cruise without exceeding Vne? This should raise the questions: What is max structural cruise meant to protect? and, Is max structural cruise a "LIMITATION" , or a NORMAL OPERATION PROCEDURE? If the latter, then, I submit it is no different than any other number within the yellow arc and does not deserve to be over dignified beyond those numbers within such parameter. In other words, it is nothing more than cocktail information. If one insists upon operating within the yellow arc, do not encounter turbulent air lest you exceed MAX GUST LOAD; now there IS a number you should know and understand beyond the cocktail hour.
Cliff Umscheid

--------

- The Matronics Yak-List Email Forum -
 

Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:

http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
Back to top
plus2s



Joined: 30 Nov 2006
Posts: 65
Location: NEW ZEALAND
PostPosted: Tue Jul 28, 2009 7:14 pm    Post subject: Maximum structural cruise Reply with quote
Andrew

I believe Air New Zealand do have xray equipment at Chrischurch

Regards

Keith

Yak 52
Ashburton NZ

--- On Wed, 29/7/09, Roger Kemp M.D. <viperdoc(at)mindspring.com> wrote:

Quote:

From: Roger Kemp M.D. <viperdoc(at)mindspring.com>
Subject: RE: Maximum structural cruise
To: yak-list(at)matronics.com
Received: Wednesday, 29 July, 2009, 2:24 PM


Andrew,

So you are one of the guys involved in restoring that YAK 3 in NZ. I think I talked to someone about that bird at onetime then decided the expense would exceed the benefit. Looks like that may well be the case with the current economy here in the US.

To answer your question, yes the capability to eddy current and magnaflux along with, NDT (xray) exist. The expense of xraying the airframe for me is prohibitive. I probably could get the guys in the airframe shop to NDT my bird when they are doing one of our jets but that would be highly illegal for me to ask for that. So, I just have to pull panels and stick a digital camera in the wings and fuselage to snap pictures of those places that I cannot see by looking in. Another thing to invest in I would guess (I have not yet) is a bore scope. Still though, if you can see the cracks with your eyes it is already a big problem.

http://www.directindustry.com/scripts/IDPHeader.php?s=9257&URL=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.geinspectiontechnologies.com%2Fen%2Fproducts%2Feddy_current%2Findex.html&IDVisite=&MotCle=&RefCat=&IDProduit=57817&IDProdSource=&SourceType=Produit

The above url will show you a portable eddy current system (Pulstec) made by GE for the aerospace industry. I have not had the guts to ask the cost of the devise and the practicality of having a portable eddy current sytem begs practicality for me.

Magnaflux is a spray kit that can be found in most auto parts stores. It is a combination of penetrentt and developer that you spray on the surface to detect a crack. It works well for accessible areas of the airframe. I used it to find a crack in my fuel tank on my 50. Here is the URL for Magnaflux for more info. http://www.magnaflux.com/ProductOverview/Penetrant/tabid/96/Default.aspx

The two above systems are affordable not practical for doing a complete spar. Someone else can comment of that. I

Doc



From: owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of ACTIVE NZ - Andrew
Sent: Monday, July 27, 2009 11:30 PM
To: yak-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: RE: Maximum structural cruise



DOC



Please excuse me for intruding on your list. I fly a Harmon Rocket, (mainly) but eavesdrop on the Yak list cos I'm in a partnership that is rebuilding a Yak-3 in New Zealand.



Anyway...



I have been concerned about this issue for some time, in my Harmon Rocket. It goes kinda fast, and sometimes I hit pretty harsh bumps when I'm flying in the yellow arc. (yeah, I know, I should anticipate better.) I've often wondered if there's a way to check for metal fatigue or overstressing - is this magnaflux thing something that can be done to wing and horizontal stablizer spars? Is it a reasonably common procedure (ie, likely to be available in NZ)...or a real specialist kinda thing?



Andrew








[quote][b]

- The Matronics Yak-List Email Forum -
 

Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:

http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
viperdoc(at)mindspring.co
Guest
PostPosted: Tue Jul 28, 2009 7:44 pm    Post subject: Maximum structural cruise Reply with quote
Cliff,
I was using your own terminology from your post to reply with. Personally, the Ops Limits published in the POH and the DASH 1 are the numbers I am familiar with when flying my spam can or YAK.  With the  my guys in the squadron it is the DASH 1. Like Jon (Saber), I too have had to scrounge to find the Regulator V speeds.
Part 23 of the FAA Reg addresses all of the catagories that you refer to for civilian normal, utility, aerobatic, and commuter category aircraft. The following URL will take you to the electronic version of the FAA Regs. http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/text/text-idx?c=ecfr;sid=6da4e564d2b101b3527c1d742e918420;rgn=div5;view=text;node=14%3A1.0.1.3.10;idno=14;cc=ecfr#14:1.0.1.3.10.3.70.8   FAA reg 23.33 refers to the Gust Limitations you refered to. The AF has its’ own set of regs that address the ops limits as does the published DASH 1 for each of the operational aircraft. I am not aware of a Max Mach for the F16. I am aware of max G limitations for various stores configurations.
Were you referring to Critical Mach? Mcr? The number where the aircraft is flying  at the lowest Mach number at which the airflow over a small region of the wing reaches the speed of sound?  Are you trying to take me down the path of a discussion on Mach tuck. If so, why and what does it have to do with flying YAK 50’s? We are never going to get there so compressibility is not an issue. It was an issue for the Bf 109, P-51, P-38, P-47, Spitfire, Me-262 and the P-80 along with the Gloster Meteor. I have not heard the Russians discuss it with the YAK 3’s but they probably experienced Mach tuck too. It was an issue with the Mig 15 early own as I understand too. Then again the intake was subject to Mcr with shock wave development in the intake causing compressor stalls too. A lot has been learned about flying transonic and supersonic since we were kids.
I believe your question was “ How many people do you know who have "busted their asses" due to exceeding max structural cruise without exceeding Vne” The answer is 3 that I am aware of personally that broke up operating within the published ops limits for the particular aircraft. You’ll have to tell me what the max structural cruise is though. Are we back to operating in the yellow arc?
Check 6,
Doc

PS.
By the way, tonight at 2200, the Military Channel is having show on called Operation Red October. It is about German owned MIG 29 vs the F-18. Enjoy.

From: owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of netmaster15(at)juno.com
Sent: Tuesday, July 28, 2009 1:15 AM
To: yak-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: RE: Maximum structural cruise


Doc, Thankyou for your response on the subject of " max structural cruise" . If I understand you correctly we are both saying the same thing; the water gets a bit muddy when we try to reconcile simantic differences. eg, reference your first paragraph: " ....while operating in STRUCTURAL CRUISE LIMITATION...." Please define "structural cruise". Also, what discipline categorizes structural cruise as a LIMITATION as opposed to a NORMAL OPERATING condition? All Operations Manuals I have been exposed to in the last 63 years cite Limitations as Vne, VA, Vlo, Vle, Vfe,max allow. TO Gr WT, max fuel, max tire speed, max pressure differential, max operating altitude, plus several other operating limitations. All these limitations are derived from one source; the TYPE CERTIFICATE AND DATA SHEETS and amendments thereto, eg, supplemental type certificates if applicable. Also in your first paragraph you use the phrase "....while operating within their envelope...." But you do not specify what envelope you're referring to. I agree, there is no yellow arc on the airspeed indicator in an F-5 but there is certainly a Mach meter and a Max Mach operating LIMITATION. Plainly, it is very difficult to translate terminology between two different disciplines.
I'll have to finish this treatise at a later time; I'm already beyond my curfew limitation. I look forward to your continuing thoughts on this subject. BTW, I currently own and fly both a YAK -50 and a Harmon Rocket and you're correct, I don't want any major dissassemblies at altitude so I'm always alert for new ways to assure the aircraft remains in reuseable condition. Cheers!
Cliff

--------

- The Matronics Yak-List Email Forum -
 

Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:

http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
Back to top
andrew(at)nzactive.com
Guest
PostPosted: Tue Jul 28, 2009 8:59 pm    Post subject: Maximum structural cruise Reply with quote
Sweet. Thx for info, doc & keith...will follow up.

And, uh, I never HEARD of an aircraft where the expense exceeds the benefit. Do they make them? Smile

Andrew



From: owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Keith Pickford
Sent: Wednesday, July 29, 2009 3:31 PM
To: yak-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: RE: Maximum structural cruise

Andrew

I believe Air New Zealand do have xray equipment at Chrischurch

Regards

Keith

Yak 52
Ashburton NZ

--- On Wed, 29/7/09, Roger Kemp M.D. <viperdoc(at)mindspring.com> wrote:

Quote:

From: Roger Kemp M.D. <viperdoc(at)mindspring.com>
Subject: RE: Maximum structural cruise
To: yak-list(at)matronics.com
Received: Wednesday, 29 July, 2009, 2:24 PM

UNKNOWN { FONT-FAMILY: "Cambria Math"; panose-1: 2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4 } UNKNOWN { FONT-FAMILY: Calibri; panose-1: 2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4 } UNKNOWN { FONT-FAMILY: Tahoma; panose-1: 2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4 } UNKNOWN { FONT-FAMILY: Consolas; panose-1: 2 11 6 9 2 2 4 3 2 4 } UNKNOWN { FONT-FAMILY: Verdana; panose-1: 2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4 } #yiv1807305833 #yiv1807305833 P.MsoNormal { FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman", "serif" } #yiv1807305833 LI.MsoNormal { FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman", "serif" } #yiv1807305833 DIV.MsoNormal { FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman", "serif" } #yiv1807305833 A:link { COLOR: blue; TEXT-DECORATION: underline } #yiv1807305833 SPAN.MsoHyperlink { COLOR: blue; TEXT-DECORATION: underline } #yiv1807305833 A:visited { COLOR: purple; TEXT-DECORATION: underline } #yiv1807305833 SPAN.MsoHyperlinkFollowed { COLOR: purple; TEXT-DECORATION: underline } #yiv1807305833 P { FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN-LEFT: 0in; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0in; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman", "serif" } #yiv1807305833 PRE { FONT-SIZE: 10pt; MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Courier New" } #yiv1807305833 SPAN.HTMLPreformattedChar { FONT-FAMILY: Consolas } #yiv1807305833 SPAN.EmailStyle20 { COLOR: #1f497d; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri", "sans-serif" } #yiv1807305833 SPAN.EmailStyle22 { COLOR: #1f497d; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri", "sans-serif" } #yiv1807305833 .MsoChpDefault { FONT-SIZE: 10pt } UNKNOWN { MARGIN: 1in } #yiv1807305833 DIV.Section1 { }
Andrew,

So you are one of the guys involved in restoring that YAK 3 in NZ. I think I talked to someone about that bird at onetime then decided the expense would exceed the benefit. Looks like that may well be the case with the current economy here in the US.

To answer your question, yes the capability to eddy current and magnaflux along with, NDT (xray) exist. The expense of xraying the airframe for me is prohibitive. I probably could get the guys in the airframe shop to NDT my bird when they are doing one of our jets but that would be highly illegal for me to ask for that. So, I just have to pull panels and stick a digital camera in the wings and fuselage to snap pictures of those places that I cannot see by looking in. Another thing to invest in I would guess (I have not yet) is a bore scope. Still though, if you can see the cracks with your eyes it is already a big problem.

http://www.directindustry.com/scripts/IDPHeader.php?s=9257&URL=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.geinspectiontechnologies.com%2Fen%2Fproducts%2Feddy_current%2Findex.html&IDVisite=&MotCle=&RefCat=&IDProduit=57817&IDProdSource=&SourceType=Produit

The above url will show you a portable eddy current system (Pulstec) made by GE for the aerospace industry. I have not had the guts to ask the cost of the devise and the practicality of having a portable eddy current sytem begs practicality for me.

Magnaflux is a spray kit that can be found in most auto parts stores. It is a combination of penetrentt and developer that you spray on the surface to detect a crack. It works well for accessible areas of the airframe. I used it to find a crack in my fuel tank on my 50. Here is the URL for Magnaflux for more info. http://www.magnaflux.com/ProductOverview/Penetrant/tabid/96/Default.aspx

The two above systems are affordable not practical for doing a complete spar. Someone else can comment of that. I

Doc



From: owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of ACTIVE NZ - Andrew
Sent: Monday, July 27, 2009 11:30 PM
To: yak-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: RE: Maximum structural cruise





DOC



Please excuse me for intruding on your list. I fly a Harmon Rocket, (mainly) but eavesdrop on the Yak list cos I'm in a partnership that is rebuilding a Yak-3 in New Zealand.



Anyway...



I have been concerned about this issue for some time, in my Harmon Rocket. It goes kinda fast, and sometimes I hit pretty harsh bumps when I'm flying in the yellow arc. (yeah, I know, I should anticipate better.) I've often wondered if there's a way to check for metal fatigue or overstressing - is this magnaflux thing something that can be done to wing and horizontal stablizer spars? Is it a reasonably common procedure (ie, likely to be available in NZ)...or a real specialist kinda thing?



Andrew










[quote]

href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/c
[b]

- The Matronics Yak-List Email Forum -
 

Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:

http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
Back to top
jan.mevis(at)informavia.b
Guest
PostPosted: Tue Jul 28, 2009 10:55 pm    Post subject: Maximum structural cruise Reply with quote
I once did +9G and -5G on my Yak 50. No damage, theoretically allowed, but a very unwise thing to do. And I'll do it NEVER again, not with a Yak 50.
Yak 50's are destined to be treated as oldtimers. Nice and smooth aerobatics, formation flying. That's it.
The 55 is a much stronger built. But even then, why would you pull more than +6G or push more then -3G, unless you try to win Advanced competition ? And for Unlimited you could barely even participate with a 55.

Jan
YK50 RA2005K

--

- The Matronics Yak-List Email Forum -
 

Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:

http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
Back to top
richard.goode(at)russiana
Guest
PostPosted: Wed Jul 29, 2009 12:18 am    Post subject: Maximum structural cruise Reply with quote
The 55 is far stronger than the 50,and Mark is totally correct about the
50-when used by the Soviet Team the TOTAL life of the 50 was 47 hours.In
more general DOSAAF use it was 300 only.Of course average Western use is
much more gentle.
For the 55,the only issue is the change to a modified top fueselage to egine
mount bracket which should be changed at 250 hours if the plane was/is flown
hard-ie at 9G.

Richard Goode Aerobatics
Rhodds Farm
Lyonshall
Hereford
HR5 3LW
United Kingdom
[quote]
Tel: +44 (0) 1544 340120
Fax: +44 (0) 1544 340129
www.russianaeros.com
I’m currently in Sri Lanka but this Mail is working,and my local phone is
+94 779 132 160.

---

- The Matronics Yak-List Email Forum -
 

Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:

http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
Back to top
viperdoc(at)mindspring.co
Guest
PostPosted: Wed Jul 29, 2009 4:39 am    Post subject: Maximum structural cruise Reply with quote
Yes they do when the runway on your home field to short to meet Vref but the hanger that you own and is big enough to accommodate it is there. Same reason the L-39 idea went out the window. Will just have to be happy with the 50 and 52 for now.
Good luck and Cheers,
Doc

From: owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of ACTIVE NZ - Andrew
Sent: Wednesday, July 29, 2009 12:02 AM
To: yak-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: RE: Maximum structural cruise



Sweet. Thx for info, doc & keith...will follow up.

And, uh, I never HEARD of an aircraft where the expense exceeds the benefit. Do they make them? Smile

Andrew






From: owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Keith Pickford
Sent: Wednesday, July 29, 2009 3:31 PM
To: yak-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: RE: Maximum structural cruise
Andrew



I believe Air New Zealand do have xray equipment at Chrischurch



Regards



Keith



Yak 52

Ashburton NZ

--- On Wed, 29/7/09, Roger Kemp M.D. <viperdoc(at)mindspring.com> wrote:
Quote:


From: Roger Kemp M.D. <viperdoc(at)mindspring.com>
Subject: RE: Maximum structural cruise
To: yak-list(at)matronics.com
Received: Wednesday, 29 July, 2009, 2:24 PM
Andrew,

So you are one of the guys involved in restoring that YAK 3 in NZ. I think I talked to someone about that bird at onetime then decided the expense would exceed the benefit. Looks like that may well be the case with the current economy here in the US.

To answer your question, yes the capability to eddy current and magnaflux along with, NDT (xray) exist. The expense of xraying the airframe for me is prohibitive. I probably could get the guys in the airframe shop to NDT my bird when they are doing one of our jets but that would be highly illegal for me to ask for that. So, I just have to pull panels and stick a digital camera in the wings and fuselage to snap pictures of those places that I cannot see by looking in. Another thing to invest in I would guess (I have not yet) is a bore scope. Still though, if you can see the cracks with your eyes it is already a big problem.
http://www.directindustry.com/scripts/IDPHeader.php?s=9257&URL=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.geinspectiontechnologies.com%2Fen%2Fproducts%2Feddy_current%2Findex.html&IDVisite=&MotCle=&RefCat=&IDProduit=57817&IDProdSource=&SourceType=Produit
The above url will show you a portable eddy current system (Pulstec) made by GE for the aerospace industry. I have not had the guts to ask the cost of the devise and the practicality of having a portable eddy current sytem begs practicality for me.
Magnaflux is a spray kit that can be found in most auto parts stores. It is a combination of penetrentt and developer that you spray on the surface to detect a crack. It works well for accessible areas of the airframe. I used it to find a crack in my fuel tank on my 50. Here is the URL for Magnaflux for more info. http://www.magnaflux.com/ProductOverview/Penetrant/tabid/96/Default.aspx
The two above systems are affordable not practical for doing a complete spar. Someone else can comment of that. I
Doc

From: owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of ACTIVE NZ - Andrew
Sent: Monday, July 27, 2009 11:30 PM
To: yak-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: RE: Maximum structural cruise



DOC

Please excuse me for intruding on your list. I fly a Harmon Rocket, (mainly) but eavesdrop on the Yak list cos I'm in a partnership that is rebuilding a Yak-3 in New Zealand.

Anyway...

I have been concerned about this issue for some time, in my Harmon Rocket. It goes kinda fast, and sometimes I hit pretty harsh bumps when I'm flying in the yellow arc. (yeah, I know, I should anticipate better.) I've often wondered if there's a way to check for metal fatigue or overstressing - is this magnaflux thing something that can be done to wing and horizontal stablizer spars? Is it a reasonably common procedure (ie, likely to be available in NZ)...or a real specialist kinda thing?

Andrew




Quote:
href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-Listhref="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.comhref="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/c
0
Quote:
1
Quote:
2
Quote:
3
Quote:
4
Quote:
5
Quote:
6
Quote:
7
Quote:
8
Quote:
9
Quote:
href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
0
Quote:
href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
1
Quote:
href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
2
Quote:
href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
3
Quote:
href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
4
[quote][b]

- The Matronics Yak-List Email Forum -
 

Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:

http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
Back to top
jblake207(at)COMCAST.NET
Guest
PostPosted: Wed Jul 29, 2009 5:17 am    Post subject: Maximum structural cruise Reply with quote
My bride is of the opinion that ALL airplanes not used for transport exceed the benefit. JB---

- The Matronics Yak-List Email Forum -
 

Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:

http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
Back to top
viperdoc(at)mindspring.co
Guest
PostPosted: Wed Jul 29, 2009 6:09 am    Post subject: Maximum structural cruise Reply with quote
Wives…go figure! If it is not benefiting the nest then it is of no benefit at all.
Doc

From: owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of jblake207(at)comcast.net
Sent: Wednesday, July 29, 2009 8:11 AM
To: yak-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: Re: Maximum structural cruise



My bride is of the opinion that ALL airplanes not used for transport exceed the benefit.  JB
---

- The Matronics Yak-List Email Forum -
 

Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:

http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
Back to top
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> Yak-List All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Page 1 of 1

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group